Folk and expert theories of emotion and the disappearance of psychology

Zoltan Kovecses

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/ths.2002.014

Abstract


Emotion theories are of two kinds: folk and expert theories. Folk theories of emotion can be reconstructed, for instance, on the basis of language used about the emotions. In this sense, folk theories of emotion are reconstructions of lay views that can be represented by folk, or cultural, models. Expert theories, on the other hand, are scientific constructions by experts, who describe (on the basis of some evidence available to them) what they take emotions to be. As I have shown in several publications (e.g., Kovecses, 1986, 1990), many of our folk theories of emotion are based on certain biological-physiological processes. What this means is that the way we conceptualize the emotions is to some extent constrained by bodily processes. T’he general version of this claim in cognitive linguistics is that abstract concepts are in part based on concrete functions and processes of the human body and its interaction with other objects in physical and cultural space (Johnson, 1987). What is the relationship between folk theories and expert theories of emotion? Indeed, we can ask whether the people who create our expert theories of emotion can free themselves from the folk theories that they obviously share with other members of their culture (in their “role” as lay people). I will argue that, at least in many cases, expert theories can be considered to be extensions of folk theories.

Keywords


folk theories; expert theories; emotions; psychology; love; cognitive models

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alston, W. P. 1967. Emotion and feeling. In P. Edwards (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Vol. 2.). New York: Macmillan and the Free Press.

Bumyeat, M. F. n.d. Anger and revenge. (Manuscript)

Buss, D. M. 1988. Love acts. In R.J. Sternberg and M.L. Barnes (eds.) The Psychology of Love. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Churchland, P. S. 1986. Neurophilosophy. Toward a Unified Science of the Mind Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Ekman, P, R. W. Levenson, and W. V. Friesen. 1983. Autonomic nervous system activity distinguishes among emotions, Science 221: 1208-1210.

Fromm, E. 1956. The Art of Loving. New York: Harper and Row. Folk and expert theories of emotion and the disappearance of psychology 345

Geeraerts, D. and Grondealers, S. 1995. Looking back at anger: Cultural traditions and metaphorical patterns. In J. Taylor and R. MacLaury (eds.) Language and the Cognitive Construal of the World. 153-179.

Hatfield, E. 1988. Passionate and Companiote Love. In R .J. Sternberg and M. L. Barnes (eds.) The Psychology of Love. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Heider, K. 1991. Landscapes of Emotion: Mapping ‘Three Cultures of Emotion in Indonesia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

James, W. 1890/ 1950. The Principles of Psychology. (2 vols.). New York: Henry Holt. Johnson, M. 1987. The Body in the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kovecses, Z. 1986. Metaphors of Anger, Pride, and Love. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Kovecses, Z. 1988. The Language of Love. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press. Kovecses, Z. 1990. Emotion Concepts. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Kovecses, Z. 1991. A linguist’s quest for love. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 8, 77-97.

Kovecses, Z. 2000. Metaphor and Emotion. Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kovecses, Z. and G. Radden. 1998. Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics 9-7, 37-77.

Levenson, R. W., Ekman, P., Heider, K„ and Friesen, W. V. 1992. Emotion and autonomic nervous system activity in the Minangkabau of West Sumatra, J. Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 972-988.

Leventhal, H. and Scherer, K. 1987. The relationship of emotion to cognition: A functional approach to a semantic controversy. Cognition and Emotion, 1 (1) 3-28.

Newton-Smith, W. 1973. A conceptual investigation of love. In A. Montefiori (ed.) Philosophy and Personal Relations. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Oatley, K. and Johnson-Laird, P. N. 1987. Towards a cognitive theory of emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 1 (1) 29-50.

Padel, R. 1992. In and Out of the Mind. Greek Images of the Tragic Self. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Parrott, W. G. 1995. The heart and the head. Everyday conceptions of being emotional. In James A. Russell, Jose-Miguel Fernandez-Dols, Antony S.R.

Manstead, and J. C. Wellenkamp (eds.) Everyday Conceptions of Emotion. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 73-84.

Peele, S. 1975. Love and Addiction. New York: Taplinger.

Quinn, N. 1991. The cultural basis of metaphor, in J.W. Fernandez (ed), Beyond Metaphor. The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp. 56- -93.

Radden, G. 1998. The conceptualisation of emotional causality by means of prepositional phrases. In A. Athanasiadou and E. Tabakowska (eds.) Speaking of Emotions. Conceptualisation and Expression. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 273-294.

Radden, G. and Kovecses, Z. 1999. Towards a theory of metonymy. In G. Radden and U-K. Panther (eds.) Metonymy in Cognition and Language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Rippere, Vicky. 1994. An empirical anthropological method for investigating common sense. In Jurg Siegfried (ed.) The Status of Common Sense in Psychology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 279-304.

Rubin, Z. 1970. Measurement of romantic love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 16: 265-73.

Schachter, S. and Singer, J. 1962. Cognitive, social and physiological determinants of emotional states, Psychological Review, 69, 379-399.

Siegfried, J. Ed. 1994. The Status of Common Sense in Psychology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Solomon, R. 1981. Love: Emotion, Myth, and Metaphor. New York: Doubleday Anchor.

Sternberg, R. J. 1986. A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review 93: 119-135.

Taylor, G. 1979. Love. In T. Honderich and M. Burnyeat (eds.) Philosophy as It Is. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Walster, E. 1971. Passionate love. In B.I. Murstein (ed.) Theories of Attraction and Love. New York: Springer-Verlag.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.





ISSN 2392-1196 (online)

Partnerzy platformy czasopism